On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:18:20PM +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote: > Duncan wrote: > > Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev > > likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^) > > > > Still, I'd prefer it referenced just for definition's sake, but when the > > portage dev says it isn't a superfluous reference, and that particular > > section is specifying portage implementation... > > Nope, that particular section is specifying methods of interaction > between Portage and user.
It's not an issue. So... no complaints, this means this *is* on the schedule for council, yes? ~harring
pgptygbNibkIe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
